I think that is exactly my point. Anyone who expects corporations (or anyone at all, really) to act in a manner that does NOT serve their best interests is a bit daft.

Of course - which is why they need to be regulated to ensure that the needs of American citizens trump corporate profits.

And how do we do that? Are you going to have government tell a company how much money they are allowed to make? Going to have government set price controls? Wondering what the amazing solution to all our worries and problems will be.

Actually, we do regulate industries that have monopolistic pricing to more closely match what a free market would deliver. See anti-trust regulations, etc. Which is kind of what the oil market is behaving like.

Is there one single oil company that has a monopoly?

Monopolistic pricing does not necessarily mean monopoly. There are other avenues that can lead to monopolistic pricing, whether they are high barriers to entry, cartel-like behavior, etc. The point is that the government does regulate other industries as to what they are allowed to charge and designates base profit levels. Or more to the point - there is precedent for the government telling a company how much money it is allowed to make (the original question).

I think that is exactly my point. Anyone who expects corporations (or anyone at all, really) to act in a manner that does NOT serve their best interests is a bit daft.

Of course - which is why they need to be regulated to ensure that the needs of American citizens trump corporate profits.

And how do we do that? Are you going to have government tell a company how much money they are allowed to make? Going to have government set price controls? Wondering what the amazing solution to all our worries and problems will be.

Actually, we do regulate industries that have monopolistic pricing to more closely match what a free market would deliver. See anti-trust regulations, etc. Which is kind of what the oil market is behaving like.

Is there one single oil company that has a monopoly?

What do you suppose the cost of entry into the "multinational oil company" club is? and, part b)

If barriers to entry into a market are realistically prohibitive, can a "free market" truly be said to be in place, and c)

If the "free market" is supplying a resource that is a functional necessity to live, is it really desirable to allow unregulated domination of that resource by oligarchies that realistically do not compete except within a small (and potentially cooperative) and restricted group?

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

It's not an issue of a "private company" making "too much" profit. I couldn't care less how much a private company operating in a free market getting rewarded by consumers speaking with their wallets makes. But that model breaks down when the "private company" is a) involved in setting public policy b) in a functionally closed market and they are c) selling goods that consumers practically speaking, are forced to buy and d) are providing products that literally control every other facet of the economy.

Edit: I did not answer your question. IMHO, a private energy company should be reasonably allowed to make $13.85 million USD annually. Too much, would, I think (and again, this is only my opinion) probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 32.75 million.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

It's not an issue of a "private company" making "too much" profit. I couldn't care less how much a private company operating in a free market getting rewarded by consumers speaking with their wallets makes. But that model breaks down when the "private company" is a) involved in setting public policy b) in a functionally closed market and they are c) selling goods that consumers practically speaking, are forced to buy and d) are providing products that literally control every other facet of the economy.

Edit: I did not answer your question. IMHO, a private energy company should be reasonably allowed to make $13.85 million USD annually. Too much, would, I think (and again, this is only my opinion) probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 32.75 million.

Well as profit is what gets turned back into a company for new plants, expansion, and other such things, your ideas of how much profit should be allowed would destroy any decent sized company on the planet.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

It's not an issue of a "private company" making "too much" profit. I couldn't care less how much a private company operating in a free market getting rewarded by consumers speaking with their wallets makes. But that model breaks down when the "private company" is a) involved in setting public policy b) in a functionally closed market and they are c) selling goods that consumers practically speaking, are forced to buy and d) are providing products that literally control every other facet of the economy.

Edit: I did not answer your question. IMHO, a private energy company should be reasonably allowed to make $13.85 million USD annually. Too much, would, I think (and again, this is only my opinion) probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 32.75 million.

Well as profit is what gets turned back into a company for new plants, expansion, and other such things, your ideas of how much profit should be allowed would destroy any decent sized company on the planet.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

It's not an issue of a "private company" making "too much" profit. I couldn't care less how much a private company operating in a free market getting rewarded by consumers speaking with their wallets makes. But that model breaks down when the "private company" is a) involved in setting public policy b) in a functionally closed market and they are c) selling goods that consumers practically speaking, are forced to buy and d) are providing products that literally control every other facet of the economy.

Edit: I did not answer your question. IMHO, a private energy company should be reasonably allowed to make $13.85 million USD annually. Too much, would, I think (and again, this is only my opinion) probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 32.75 million.

Well as profit is what gets turned back into a company for new plants, expansion, and other such things, your ideas of how much profit should be allowed would destroy any decent sized company on the planet.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Yes I will seriously argue that they are not a monopoly.

That was not the question.

I said they were not a monopoly earlier, you want me to argue something I never stated, so I felt it was wise to remind you of what I actually said, not what you want to think I said.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Yes I will seriously argue that they are not a monopoly.

That was not the question.

I said they were not a monopoly earlier, you want me to argue something I never stated, so I felt it was wise to remind you of what I actually said, not what you want to think I said.

You are asking explicitly of there is more than one oil company consumers can choose from. I think that, knowing that the answer is no, you are implying that there cannot be a monopoly. After that I get a little fuzzy. You seem to be implying that because there is no monopoly in the strict sense that there must be a free market in operation and regulation is undesirable. My question is whether or not you believe that the "free market" surrounding the energy market is operating as a free market should.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Yes I will seriously argue that they are not a monopoly.

That was not the question.

I said they were not a monopoly earlier, you want me to argue something I never stated, so I felt it was wise to remind you of what I actually said, not what you want to think I said.

You are asking explicitly of there is more than one oil company consumers can choose from. I think that, knowing that the answer is no, you are implying that there cannot be a monopoly. After that I get a little fuzzy. You seem to be implying that because there is no monopoly in the strict sense that there must be a free market in operation and regulation is undesirable. My question is whether or not you believe that the "free market" surrounding the energy market is operating as a free market should.

Are you arguing that the Oil Companies should be limited in what they can charge their distributors? Or are you arguing that the distributers should be limited in what they can charge consumers? Or both?

I guess I am unclear as to the way the oil companies opperate. It has been my impression that government regulation of an industry generally results in consumer costs going up with repect to that industry.

Again ill ask the question for all of you who think that oil and gas companies are making too much money and need to be regulated far more by the government. How much profit should they as a private company be allowed to make? How much money is 'too much' money for them to make?

I've already answered why this isn't all Big Oil's fault, so I'm not sure why you seem to be stuck on this one smaller branch of the issue. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what unregulated monopolistic pricing does to the market. All one has to do is look 100 years ago.

Well as oil companies arent a monopoly, we dont need to look anywhere to compare it to what might have been a monopoly in the past. This isnt standard oil you know.

Are you seriously going to argue that the oilagarchies are functioning in a free an open market? Really?

Yes I will seriously argue that they are not a monopoly.

That was not the question.

I said they were not a monopoly earlier, you want me to argue something I never stated, so I felt it was wise to remind you of what I actually said, not what you want to think I said.

You are asking explicitly of there is more than one oil company consumers can choose from. I think that, knowing that the answer is no, you are implying that there cannot be a monopoly. After that I get a little fuzzy. You seem to be implying that because there is no monopoly in the strict sense that there must be a free market in operation and regulation is undesirable. My question is whether or not you believe that the "free market" surrounding the energy market is operating as a free market should.

Are you arguing that the Oil Companies should be limited in what they can charge their distributors? Or are you arguing that the distributers should be limited in what they can charge consumers? Or both?

I guess I am unclear as to the way the oil companies opperate. It has been my impression that government regulation of an industry generally results in consumer costs going up with repect to that industry.

I'm not really arguing that any specific aspect of energy pricing should be limited... It's more that I'm arguing that the "free market" surrounding energy seems broken and as a result is being exploited by the energy companies. The real joke is going to come when the (speculative) raw energy prices drop by 50 percent, but the powers that be pass only 25% of that drop on to consumers and we all jump and shout about how great it is that gas is "only" 2.50 a gallon while the suppliers snicker at 25% greater profits that they are seeing now (Numbers are for argument purposes only.. I have no idea what the actual percentages will be). Boiling water, and frogs, and all that

As someone who lived through the joys of energy deregulation in CA, I can tell you that that whole thing about competition benefiting the consumer only works when there actually is competition. When competition is absent, businesses have no incentive to innovate and no pressure to compete with pricing. Add in a captive market (we all need energy) and the result is Very Bad Things.

People continue to drive all over the place in lavish vehicles and trucks, many that get well below 20 MPG.

Wow, what a shocker the oil companies made money.

If people pay it they will charge it. You can't curb the money that companies make because that defeats the fundamental idea around Capitalism. Capitalism only works if people are greedy. Its a harsh reality, but it's a fact.

Our society is greedy in general as seen by most Americans spending beyond their own means.

Now government can help by regulating that vehicles need to get X MPG. That's how they can help society. Another option would be to give incentives to companies that use or produce alternative energy and or vehicles with that concept.

Oh wait, they are already doing that so I guess it comes back to the behaviors of the public.

With all the gas sucking vehicles on the road and hardly anyone changing their driving habits, it makes me wonder if most people have enough disposable income to just keep driving their big vehicles or they just keep charging it and going deeper in debt.

It's really not that much money. If I couldn't afford a 25% increase in gas prices, I really should not have bought that vehicle to begin with. Budgeting to 100% of your income is... not wise

+1

We're not at that point, and never will be. We will make drastic changes if necessary to make sure we can still stuff some money into savings. Gotta have some extra for those unanticipated things that pop up.

With all the gas sucking vehicles on the road and hardly anyone changing their driving habits, it makes me wonder if most people have enough disposable income to just keep driving their big vehicles or they just keep charging it and going deeper in debt.

Let's not get carried away. Yes gas prices have gone up. But we are talking about an extra $25-$50 a week for most people.

With all the gas sucking vehicles on the road and hardly anyone changing their driving habits, it makes me wonder if most people have enough disposable income to just keep driving their big vehicles or they just keep charging it and going deeper in debt.

Let's not get carried away. Yes gas prices have gone up. But we are talking about an extra $25-$50 a week for most people.

***Looks like Gellar beat me to the post.***

If think $25-50 a week isn't much, I envy you.

It's not just gas going up, it's everything else. Add it all up, and it's depressing.

With all the gas sucking vehicles on the road and hardly anyone changing their driving habits, it makes me wonder if most people have enough disposable income to just keep driving their big vehicles or they just keep charging it and going deeper in debt.

Let's not get carried away. Yes gas prices have gone up. But we are talking about an extra $25-$50 a week for most people.

***Looks like Gellar beat me to the post.***

If think $25-50 a week isn't much, I envy you.

It's not just gas going up, it's everything else. Add it all up, and it's depressing.

That would be a major hit to our budget. Fortunately our driving habits are such that the gas bill has only gone up about $25 per month...still comfortably under its budget ceiling.

People continue to drive all over the place in lavish vehicles and trucks, many that get well below 20 MPG.

Wow, what a shocker the oil companies made money.

If people pay it they will charge it. You can't curb the money that companies make because that defeats the fundamental idea around Capitalism. Capitalism only works if people are greedy. Its a harsh reality, but it's a fact.

Our society is greedy in general as seen by most Americans spending beyond their own means.

Now government can help by regulating that vehicles need to get X MPG. That's how they can help society. Another option would be to give incentives to companies that use or produce alternative energy and or vehicles with that concept.

Oh wait, they are already doing that so I guess it comes back to the behaviors of the public.

Gonna be hard to avoid that one for most people. I wonder if companies that make mostly junk food will start to lose business. I know my wife is watching the food spending closer than ever.

Fresh produce and fish are the most expensive part of our bill, so that's where we feel the pinch. Fortunately my veggie garden goes into the ground in a few weeks, and we'll have lots of fresh tomatoes and peppers and herbs by midsummer. I cringe every time I pay a buck for a waxed bell pepper.

Junk food is cheap. When food prices rise, lots of people cut healthy foods first. But we still eat 1-2 restaurant meals each week, so the grocery budget has some insulation that I haven't cut yet.

Food inflation is, of course, entirely due to energy prices and methanol.

People continue to drive all over the place in lavish vehicles and trucks, many that get well below 20 MPG.

Wow, what a shocker the oil companies made money.

If people pay it they will charge it. You can't curb the money that companies make because that defeats the fundamental idea around Capitalism. Capitalism only works if people are greedy. Its a harsh reality, but it's a fact.

Our society is greedy in general as seen by most Americans spending beyond their own means.

Now government can help by regulating that vehicles need to get X MPG. That's how they can help society. Another option would be to give incentives to companies that use or produce alternative energy and or vehicles with that concept.

Oh wait, they are already doing that so I guess it comes back to the behaviors of the public.

Well as profit is what gets turned back into a company for new plants, expansion, and other such things

a lot of big industries actually manage to finagle their depreciation allowances to do this. oil seems to have a hard time doing even this (remember that enormous refinery explosion due to decades old equipment - that could have been prevented with modern flare systems? that the government tried to mandate? that oil lobbied against? - sorry 'bout the tangent ) how about all those refineries built recently?

fact is, a lot of the money goes into dividends, salaries, and nice compensation packages. also a lot of the money was turned over to be wisely invested by a certain company responsible for such dealings. damn, what was its name? - and most of this was BEFORE the massive profits seen now! hopefully, however now well see some normal business functions, and those things you said should happen with profits will start to occur

*edit to add* one thing however is exploration - profits would have been used for that (though only to a certain extent - sometimes foreign govts will foot some of the bill). r&d for new tech and methods too - though again i think a lot of this can be captured with write offs without having to expend too much)